ISSN 1172-6938

Issue 54 • October 2013

www.coastalsociety.org.nz

CONTENTS

1 Coastal Quakes

4 Closure and Mobility ofCoastal Outlets: WestCoast, South Island

6 Onemana Beachcare

7 Oil Rigs and theBiosecurity Standard

8 Mangrove Management

10 News in Brief

11 Word from the Chair

11 Tsunami Hazards

12 Coasts and Ports

12 NZCS RegionalCoordinators

13 News from the Regions

15 Regional CoordinatorClose-up – Sharon DeLuca

15 NZCS ManagementCommittee

15 NZCS Mission Statement

16 ProfessionalDevelopment Award

16 Corporate Members

16 Disclaimer

Te Hunga Takutai o Aotearoa

Earthquake and tsunami in the Indian Ocean 2004;

Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans 2005; Java,

Indonesia tsunami 2006; Bantul, Indonesia

earthquake 2006; Cyclone Nargis and Myanmar

storm surge 2008; Santa Catarina floods and

mudslides 2008; Haiti earthquake 2010;

Christchurch earthquakes 2010 to 2012; Touhouku

earthquake and tsunami 2011; Rio de Janeiro

floods and mudslides 2011; Hurricane Sandy, New

York 2012...

Anyone keeping a global tally of recent disastersis likely to be asking: What role will the hazardsand disasters of coastal plains play in the livesand economies of 21st century humanity? In thisarticle, we reflect on this question using examplesof how different types of coastal land performedduring the Christchurch and other earthquakeevents to examine the complex of coastal-tectonichazards that are being constructed in the Tokyomegacity (see Figure 1).

Backyard observations and historicalrecords

Since the September 2010 earthquake hit theirhometown, a team of University of Canterburyresearchers have been gathering evidence fromearthquake events in coastal cities, includingChristchurch, NZ 2010 to 2012; Napier, NZ 1931;and Wairarapa, NZ 1855; as well as Touhouku, Japan2011; Haiti 2010; Alaska, US 1964; Charleston, SouthCarolina, US 1886; and Lisbon, Portugal 1755.

Coastal QuakesObservations and analyses from backyard Christchurch

to 21st century coastal megacitiesby Deirdre Hart & Christopher Gomez, Department of Geography, University of Canterbury*

Their findings show how and why coastalsettlements are disproportionately susceptible toseismic hazards. Detailed evidence of thesesettlements’ earthquake effects has revealed fourkey coastal area morphotypes which, whencombined with built environments, perform badlyduring large earthquake events:

• recent coastal plains;

• complex shoreline configurations;

• narrow coastal shelves backed by cliffs; and

• reclaimed land.

Recent coastal plains

Recent coastal plains comprise the continentaland high-island fringes of land built throughshoreline progradation and fluvial aggradationprocesses over the mid to late Holocene after sealevels stabilised. For the Christchurch area, forexample, 106 km2 or 60 per cent of the land areaon which the city is built formed over the last6500 years (see Figure 2).

Such recent coastal plains are typically relativelyflat and low-lying towards the coast, and extendinland into infilled river valleys. They include manyold abandoned and active river channels, and areformed from poorly consolidated mixtures of silts,sands and gravels saturated by shallow groundwatertables.

The combination of poorly consolidated Holocenedeposits, sea-level proximal topography and shallowcoastal and riverside water tables resulted inextreme liquefaction across large swathes of eastern*correspondence to deirdre.hart@canterbury.ac.nz

Photo: Marney Brosnan

CoastalNews

Coastal News No. 542

Christchurch between 2010 and 2012. Theliquefaction, in turn, caused subsidence of up to0.7 m per major earthquake event or aftershock,lowering land elevations and causing tidal floodingaround shorelines and river mouths. These changesalso produced catastrophic failures of the lifelinesnetworks (transport, water, gas, sewerage)throughout the coastal and river suburbs of thecity. Similarly, extensive and damaging liquefactionwas reported for the Charleston earthquake of 1886and the Alaska earthquake of 1964.

Complex shoreline configurations

Coastal plains with lifelines networks, which havebeen developed around the complex shorelineconfigurations of lagoons, estuaries and/or baysare particularly vulnerable to the effects ofliquefaction. This is because these networks lackthe inbuilt redundancy of grid systems; are heavilyreliant on bridges, which act as vulnerable networklinkages; and because liquefaction adjacent toshorelines and river banks results not only invertical deformation and subsidence but also inhorizontal rafting, cracking and lateral spreadingof the land’s surface, disrupting lifelines infrastructureabove and below ground.

Patterns of damage during the earthquakes of Haiti2010, Christchurch 2011, Charleston 1886 andWairarapa 1855 illustrate that the difficulty ofmaintaining transport network functionality aroundcomplex shorelines in earthquake-proneenvironments is both a recent and a historicalphenomenon.

Narrow coastal shelves backed by cliffs

Coastal plains, shelves and adjacent elevatedtopography have proved to be an attractiveenvironment for human settlement throughout NewZealand and globally. Around 75 per cent of NewZealanders live less than 10 km from the coast,including 96 per cent of Aucklanders, 76 per centof Wellingtonians, and 36 per cent of pre-quakeCantabrians living less than 5 km from their localshoreline.

Internationally, coastal populations are growing attwice the rate of the total population so that over50 per cent of humanity is forecast to live in coastalsettlements by 2100.

This type of coastal edge is typically prone todeformation, subsidence and horizontal displacementduring seismic events. These effects crippled theport facilities of Lyttelton, Christchurch and Port-au-Prince, Haiti, for example. In Christchurch, thisfailure was compounded by the mass movementof adjacent hillsides and cliffs, which experiencedextensive areas of collapse, rockfall and land sliding.

Reclaimed land

The sheer concentration of people, infrastructureand industry described above means that land isat a premium, and space is severely limited, inmost coastal cities today. As a result, the majorityof port infrastructure and coastal-city airport facilitieshave been constructed or expanded across reclaimedland and large-scale land reclamation programmesare underway throughout countries like Korea andJapan. This trend towards the artificialterrestrialisation of shorelines and seabed is ofconcern given that recent and historical earthquakeevents indicate that reclaimed land is prone tosignificant failures during earthquakes.

Applying our observations to a Tokyocase study

Since the early 2000s, East Asian countries havetaken a lead role on the international economicstage. The majority of these new economic leadershave much in common physiographically with NewZealand, being coastal high-island nations, straddlingthe most active tectonic margin in the world: thePacific ‘Ring of Fire’. They are characterised bygeologically young coastal plains, bordered to oneside by the sea and to the other by active mountainor volcano systems. These settings are also, likeNew Zealand, very prone to earthquakes. Theelongated shapes of island arcs, such as Indonesiaand Japan, concentrate most of their populationon recent coastal plains within the 1000-year stormsurge zone.

Figure 1: Shoreline comparison of Tokyo 1830 (top

left) versus today (top right), showing extensive

coastal land reclamation, plus the effects of the

2011 Touhouku tsunami on reclaimed coastal areas

(below).

FIgure 2: Location of the Christchurch area shoreline

around 6500 years ago (dashed blue line in A);

old river channels underlying the city’s central

business district (cyan channels in B); and dune-

like deposits underneath the central city (C: for

location see white dot in A). Sources: Brown and

Webber 1992 (A); D Lucas 2011 (B); RM Kirk (C).

CoastalNews

October 2013 3

The Japanese capital Tokyo, for instance, is largelyconstructed upon late Holocene (<6500 years old)coastal and river valley deposits with seawardmargins of anthropogenic reclaimed land andpolders (see Figure 3).

Tokyo is located in the Kanto Province in the centreof an active horseshoe-shaped chain of mountainsand volcanoes that produce immense volumes ofsediments, from which the Kanto plain is mostlyconstructed. Over the last 5000 years, the Kantoplain has grown seaward by over 2200 km2,progressively transforming open-coast environmentsinto marshes, wetlands and finally hinterland.

For the period 5000 to 4000 years ago, the landprograded by 350 km2, prograding a further 90km2 during the period 4000 to 3000 years ago,while the period from 3000 years ago to presentproduced 900 km2 of new coastal plain (seeFigure 3). Almost all of this area is topographicallyflat or low-lying.

In recent times, the Japanese have perpetuated theseaward land expansion, practicing reclamation ofnearshore and marsh environments as early as theEdo period (1603-1868), beginning in the Nihonbashiarea, and extending into the 20th century as faras the iconic ward of Odaiba, which is entirely builton sandy fill and compacted waste, and beyondwith the international Haneda airport, an artificialisland in the bay of Tokyo.

The seaward advance of the city has beenaccompanied by significant work to transform themarshlands east of Tokyo into agricultural landusing dense drainage networks. This eastwardexpansion, where the Senju ‘shitamachi’ (literallydowntown) and developments further east arelocated, is very recent. Records from the early 18thcentury describe some of these areas (for example,Ayase) as marshland needing to be tamed.

Although space is at a premium in Tokyo – the valueof the Imperial Palace land alone is estimated asequivalent to that of the state of California whilethe total Tokyo city land value is estimated to exceedthat of the entire United States – its developmentmay have a much higher cost in the event of anearthquake than anybody anticipates. Like forChristchurch, the subsurface of Tokyo is made ofabandoned river channels, drained marshes, andreclaimed land infilled over a number of historicaltime periods. This patchwork of low-lyingunconsolidated fine sediments with near-surfacewater tables makes the area very vulnerable toearthquake-induced liquefaction and amplified groundacceleration (the same way a jelly desert wobblesmore than the plate it sits upon).

Conscious of this problem and pushed by the 11March 2011 events in the Touhouku area, themetropolitan government of Tokyo has released aseries of maps predicting shaking intensities duringearthquakes across the city.

Lessons learnt

Because of its location on young estuarine andcoastal sediments, Tokyo is prone to liquefaction,bank slides and all the problems Christchurchexperienced between 2010 and 2012. Despite a levelof preparedness Christchurch could only dream of– sustained by ‘world-class engineering’ – we predictthat a major earthquake below Tokyo would likelydamage the country’s and the world’s economies.More worryingly, with the rise of East Asian economies,there are tens of other coastal megacities perchedvulnerably along the Pacific’s coastal Ring of Firemargins.

Given the poor performance of the four coastalmorphotypes identified in this article, the questionarises: What is the cost of continuing to developcoastal areas that are so susceptible to quakes andquake-induced hazards? Evidence from theChristchurch events and our desktop GIS analysesof Tokyo suggest that, in reality, our capacity toincorporate into recovery plans the lessons thatcould make coastal cities more disaster resilient islimited if the hazard links are not understood beforea quake occurs.

These case studies also illustrate that the complexof earthquake-coastal vulnerabilities we have foundis really quite predictable – for places like Dunedin,Christchurch, Wellington, Tokyo and Touhouku, it isnot difficult to find and quantify the links. Thisprovides us with a great opportunity to avoid ormitigate future development-disaster cycles forquake-prone coastal cities by becoming aware ofthese links and thus, of how to minimise theireffects; how to build resilience into everyday planning;and, before disasters occur, how to construct multi-hazard recovery methodologies.

The vulnerability of coastal cities to quakes is afinding worth acting on given the current and future-predicted concentration of habitation, infrastructureand development around our local and global coasts.

Figure 3: Shoreline change in Tokyo Bay from 5000

years ago to present. Holocene coastal progradation

and river valley infilling prior to the 16th century

created much of the land area occupied by central

Tokyo city today, while subsequent wetland drainage

and land reclamation created the land that now

constitutes the coastal suburbs, port and airport.

CoastalNews

Coastal News No. 544

A visit to the South Island’s West Coast can certainlyteach you a thing or two about water. And theNZCS 2013 Conference is a chance to come andsee for yourself!

The title of the conference “The Coast – RoughAround the Edges” (Hokitika, 19 to 22 November)alludes to both the dynamic environment of theNew Zealand coastline, as well as the rugged andeasy-going reputation of the region hosting theconference.

The West Coast is home to some of the country’sbest remaining examples of natural wetlands andwaterways. An impressive 340 waterways drainout to sea along the region’s 600-km coastline.Coasters have always had a close association withthese waterways, and the estuaries and rivermouths have become a meeting place, of not onlyfresh water with salt, but also of people withnature. It’s no coincidence that the West Coast’sthree largest towns sit at three of its largest rivermouths.

But these outlets to the sea are dynamic featuresof the landscape. Their changes and movementscan have dramatic effects on the region’s ecosystems,people and communities … and its whitebait!

The closure and mobility of river mouth outlets arenatural processes that contribute to the characterand functioning of the West Coast’s coastalenvironment. It’s important to understand andaccommodate these natural processes whileaddressing the associated natural hazards andother resource management issues.

I tend to group the West Coast's river mouths intofour main types – ‘tidal flat estuaries’, ‘gravel-bedriver mouths’, ‘tidal lagoon streams’, and ‘hillsidestreams’. They range from unmodified naturalecosystems, to highly modified ‘ditches’ with lownatural character. High energy seas, and rivers withhigh sediment loads, make them inherently dynamic.

Closure and Mobility of Coastal Outlets:West Coast, South Island

by Don Neale, NZCS Conference Committee Chair

All four types have examples where the outlets areknown to close and/or migrate alongshore.

Outlet closure is a complex event, but is typicallycaused by an over-supply of sediment from riverfloods or high seas that ‘choke’ the outlet, followedby low river flows and calm seas that are unableto breach the buildup of sediment. On the WestCoast, artificial water abstraction is unlikely to bea cause of river outlet closure, but catchmentmodification might affect the natural dynamics ofsome river mouth areas.

Outlet mobility results from a similarly complexinterplay of sea, river and shore. It is natural forsome outlets to migrate several kilometresalongshore, unless restrained by natural barriers(for example, headlands), hydrological factors (forexample, insufficient water flow), or humanintervention (for example, artificial reopening orrockworks). Historical evidence and site assessmentscan give a good indication of outlet mobility.

Patterns of outlet closure and mobility vary greatlybetween locations, but some features (such as thefrequency and duration of closure, area of inundation,and outlet position) can often be predicted to someextent based on past experience or comparisonwith similar sites. They can therefore be readilyplanned for in advance. The natural dynamics ofsome coastal areas are very strongly driven byoutlet closure and mobility, especially for the tidalflat estuary and tidal lagoon stream types.

The dynamic nature of West Coast river mouths ispart of their natural character, but when developmentencroaches upon this dynamism significant hazardsand inconveniences can arise.Demands to reopen,reposition, or otherwise modify a river outlet arenot uncommon on the West Coast. Permanently

Figure 1: As every West Coast whitebaiter knows,

the region’s river mouths are fickle creatures,

changing daily with the weather and the tides.

Photo: T Lilleby, DOC.

Figure 2: The frequent closure of the Okarito Lagoon

outlet near Westland National Park causes elevated

water levels to inundate wetland margins that

might otherwise be left permanently high and dry.

But since the early gold rush days, artificial opening

of the outlet has been necessary to avoid flooding

of the Okarito village. Closure has become more

frequent in recent years. Photo: A Short, NIWA.

CoastalNews

October 2013 5

Thanks to major conference sponsors:

open and static outlets are sometimes preferredfor a variety of reasons, aiming to eliminate thenatural closure and mobility of these sites and toreduce the flooding of adjoining land.

Human intervention at river mouth outlets issometimes a necessary part of hazard management,but can have adverse effects on natural lagoonsystems. The artificial reopening of outlets can alterthe natural dynamics and environmental values ofcoastal waterways, by degrading riparian vegetation,altering wetland hydrology, reducing natural character,and reducing outlet mobility. To say that outletreopening and repositioning just serves to hastena natural process, oversimplifies a much morecomplex situation.

These effects can often best be managed usingcase-by-case assessments and monitoring. Lowerlevels of management attention are needed on themost highly modified outlets with low naturalcharacter. The West Coast Regional Coastal Plan

recognises the need to balance natural characterwith hazard management needs, by including aschedule of outlets at which artificial opening maybe undertaken where it does not interrupt naturaldynamics. The plan also identifies significant siteswhere the protection of natural values is a priority.

Figure 3: The New River outlet near Greymouth

has naturally wandered along more than six km

of coastline. Since this photo was taken in 2006,

northern movement of the outlet has been restrained

by rockworks placed half way along the lagoon’s

length. In June 2013, the outlet broke directly out

to sea near the bottom of this photo, but has since

moved back to a more northerly position. Photo:

D Neale, DOC.

Knowledge of the dynamics of relatively naturalriver mouths on the West Coast can contribute tobroader discussions about sustainable coastalmanagement throughout New Zealand. The 2013NZCS conference in Hokitika will be a great placefor us all to have those discussions.

The themes and flavour of this year’s conference will encompass the broad scopeof the aims of NZCS, while taking the best advantage of the spectacular location,

and its rural and coastal communities. Session and poster themes are:

Communities and our coasts • Coastal scienceCoastal hazards • Coastal conservation

Managing resource conflicts, sharing natural spaces and resources

Aside from great speakers and sessions, other conference highlights include:

Fieldtrip to Punakaiki along the world-famous ‘Coast Road’ highway

Workshops on coastal monitoring, hazard planning,ports and community involvement

Movie night and mentoring breakfast for early-career coastalprofessionals and students.

21st Annual NZCS Conference19 to 22 November 2013 – Hokitika

The Coast: Rough around the Edges

Visit www.coastalsociety.org.nz/conference2013 to learn more

If your organisation is interested in sponsoring the conference,contact Graeme Jenner at graeme.jenner@beca.com

Thanks also to our other conference sponsors, including West Coast Regional Council,

Ross Dowling Marquet Griffin, Eliot Sinclair and Partners, and MWH.

CoastalNews

Coastal News No. 546

While the Nike slogan “Just do it” may not seemto have much in common with dune restorationprogrammes in New Zealand, it’s a fitting descriptionof the approach Barry Turk took when establishingOnemana Beachcare.

Located a few kilometres north of Whangamata onthe eastern Coromandel Peninsula, Onemana is abeachside settlement that features a well-stockeddairy, a local restaurant, and a few year-roundresidents. Like many places in the Coromandel, thepopulation of Onemana swells on long weekendsand during the summer. It’s one of the few placeswhere the endangered New Zealand Dotterel lives.

Onemana Beach is also home to Barry Turk whohas been affectionately described by coastal scientistJim Dahm as a “force to be reckoned with”.

Jim explains that with Barry at the helm, theOnemana Beachcare group broke record after recordwhen it came to the history of Waikato’s BeachcareProgramme.

“Barry became aware of the need for dunerestoration in 2005 after a walk on Onemana Beachwith his son who is a landscape architect in Australia.His son pointed out various issues, such as erosion,lack of managed access, and the lack of nativevegetation,” says Jim.

Never one to wait around for others to fix something,shortly after that life-changing walk Barry contactedWaikato Regional Council and was put in touchwith Jim, who is the council’s Beachcare contractor,to work on establishing the Onemana Beachcaregroup.

“Based on my knowledge of Beachcare groups andthe degraded state of the dunes, I thought we had12 to 15 years of work ahead of us,” Jim laughs.“But I hadn’t taken one very important factor intoconsideration – I was working with Barry.”

Onemana Beachcare: Communityaction begins with one individual

by Shelly Biswell, Editor

While Barry respected Jim’s knowledge andexperience, he estimated the group could achieveits objectives in three to five years. With 15 to 20volunteers helping with most plantings it seemedclear that Barry would prove to be right.

In the years from 2007 to 2009, Onemana Beachcareheld six to 10 working bees a year – anotherBeachcare record. The group planted more than8000 plants in their best year and over 30,000plants in total.

The main species planted were spinifex, pingao,knobby club rush, pohuehue, sand coprosma, sandcarex and the native spinach. “We also plantedsome sand pimelea and sand tussock at the site,but with limited success. Spinifex and pingao werethe main species planted on the frontal dune asthese are the key species for natural sand trappingand dune repair. The other species were used inthe backdune vineland community,” Jim says.

Aside from plantings, Barry says it was importantto change people’s behaviours in how they accessedthe beach. “That included creating pedestrian accessways and a kayak boardwalk, roping off newlyplanted areas, and putting up signage.”

It also meant understanding the needs of thecommunity, for example, an area at the southernend of the beach was left because it was a populararea for kids to slide.

The work also required pest control – weeds andrabbits – while the new vegetation becameestablished.

Since 2010, the work of the Onemana Beachcaregroup has been more targeted with smaller groupsof volunteers working on projects. “In fact, we haverecently done some work at the southern end(where the kids slide) to reduce erosion and havegone back and ‘spot’ planted where required,”Barry says.

Barry says it helped to have Jim working with thegroup from the start. “His working knowledge ofplants and the Coromandel was a big advantagefor the group and meant that we didn’t make manyplanting mistakes along the way. Plus his dedicationwas incredible. He showed up to most of ourplantings and was always willing to lend a hand.”

While much of the work has been ticked off forthe Onemana Beachcare group, you can still findBarry and other volunteers picking up rubbish andmaintaining the dunes on their daily walks. “Welive in a beautiful place, so it’s really just a matterof doing our bit to look after it.” he says.

Jim adds, “When we started, the vineland communitywas limited to the odd clump of knobby club rush.We have now restored this right along the back of

Barry Turk (centre) was presented with his Coastal

Champions award by Waikato Regional Council

staff and Onemana Beachcare volunteers earlier

this year. Photo: Coastal News (Coromandel

newspaper).

CoastalNews

October 2013 7

A restored Onemana Beach in 2011.

Photo: Barry Turk.

Onemana Beach before the Beachcare group was

established. Photo: Waikato Regional Council.

the frontal dune over the southern half of thebeach. At this stage, it is only a relatively narrowzone, but could be widened landward at somefuture date if desired by the community. The vinelandcommunity is still young and dominated by knobbyclub rush which provides the shelter and architecture

In August, the Kan Tan IV entered New Zealandwaters on its way to the Maari field in the TaranakiBasin which is operated by OMV New Zealand.Built in 1983 and capable of operating in waterdepths of up to 457 metres, the rig has beenused all over the world.

Biofouling can be of particular concern for rigslike the Kan Tan IV that have been stationary inthe coastal waters of other countries, says MPISenior Advisor Liz Jones. “Once introduced, marinepests such as the Mediterranean fanworm andthe sea squirt Styela clava are difficult to contain.That’s why MPI has worked to develop a newstandard under the Biosecurity Act to mitigateand manage biosecurity risks.”

While the standard is still in draft form, FrigstadOffshore, which operates the Kan Tan IV, andOMV New Zealand were keen to have the rigmeet the standard when it entered New Zealandwaters. Frigstad Offshore retained the servicesof the Cawthron Institute to develop a plan thatwould meet the standard and minimise anybiosecurity risks.

“It was a real collaborative effort between theowners and operators of the vessel, MPI, andCawthron to develop the plan,” says CawthronBiosecurity Team Leader Grant Hopkins.

When finalised, the plan was assessed andapproved by MPI under a new section of theBiosecurity Act created to manage the risks posedby craft.

The plan included a thorough cleaning of theKan Tan IV while it was in Singapore undergoingmaintenance prior to departing for New Zealand.That meant removing biofouling and sediments

from areas of the rig that were submerged duringprior drilling operations.

“Part of the work required hiring a specialiseddive team working nearly around the clock overa two-week period,” says Grant.

When work was completed, the rig was loadedonto a heavy-lift vessel (HLV) for the journey toNew Zealand. “The three-week trip on the HLVmeant that any remaining marine pests anddiseases would be dessicated,” says Grant.

The HLV and the rig’s support vessels were alsodefouled in preparation for arrival into NewZealand waters.

Liz says MPI gave pre-arrival clearance to theKan Tan IV for biofouling based on Cawthron’sreports, including photographic evidence. “Oncearriving in New Zealand in August, the Kan Tan

IV, the HLV, and support vessels were checkedand given the ‘all clear’ by MPI inspectors.”

The Kan Tan IV is expected to be active in NewZealand waters for about a year. It’s currentlybeing used to drill the Manaia-2 appraisal well,located south-west of the main Maari field.

desired by many of the vine species, but the variousvine species (pohuehue, sand coprosma, spinach)will spread over time.”

In 2013, Barry received a regional Coastal Champion

award from NZCS for his leadership on dune

restoration through Onemana Beachcare.

Oil Rigs and the Biosecurity Standardby Shelly Biswell, Editor

Kan Tan IV on its way to the Maari field in the

Taranaki Basin. Photo: OMV New Zealand.

CoastalNews

Coastal News No. 548

In early August, Environment Court Judge Smithruled on a case brought by individual Basil Graemeand Forest and Bird against decisions by the Bayof Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC) on its mangrovemanagement and sections of the proposed Bay ofPlenty Regional Policy Statement (RPS).

The decision clarifies the role of mangroves asindigenous plants that play an important role incoastal ecosystems and that councils need to beclear about the reasons for mangrove removal ona case-by-case basis says Boffa Miskell seniorecologist Dr Sharon De Luca who was an expertwitness for the appellants in the case.

“The key point in this decision is the recognitionthat mangroves have ecological value and theirremoval has no ecological benefit. Judge Smithconcluded that there will be cases where the removalof mangroves is justifiable for reasons of amenity,recreational, access, or cultural reasons and thatthese will need to be considered in the context ofthe ecological values of the mangroves and theecological effects of their removal,” she says.

Mangroves in context

Basil Graeme has been championing mangrovesand their habitat for about 40 years. “I was fortunateenough to know Professor John Morton of theUniversity of Auckland who was a staunch advocatefor mangroves at a time when their habitat wasbeing paved over to make way for development.In 1970, we fought for and won the protection ofsaltmarshes in the Bay of Plenty, but since the1990s there has been a thrust by many to get ridof mangroves, particularly if they feel the mangrovesaffect access, views or housing prices.

“Mangroves have been vilified. The social campaignagainst them has been every bit as successful asthe campaign against possums on land. The differenceis mangroves are an indigenous species and are anatural part of the ecosystem,” Basil says.

Unlike much of the rest of the world where mangrovehabitat is in decline, according to NIWA scientists

Mangrove Managementby Shelly Biswell, Editor

mangroves have been spreading in New Zealandat the rate of about four per cent each year.Sediments entering estuaries from catchments arethe main culprit behind mangrove expansion saysNIWA scientist Dr Carolyn Lundquist.

“Farming and other land-use changes, particularlyover the past 50 or 60 years, means we have highersediment loads in many of our estuaries whichchanges the sediment properties to make themmore suitable for mangroves,” she says.

For some, the expansion of mangrove habitat isan unwelcome change. They cite loss of access,amenities, and historical uses. Numerous estuarycare groups have been established across Northland,Auckland, the Coromandel, and the Bay of Plentywith mangrove removal and containment as primarytenets. It’s important to note that many of thesecare groups have done much to enhance estuariesand the coastal environment, including riparianplantings to reduce erosion, pest control, bird andsediment monitoring, rubbish removal, and thereestablishment of high-tide bird roosts.

Not surprisingly, affected councils have been underincreasing pressure to remove and containmangroves. Councils have needed to developpolicies and statements in their coastal plans onmangrove management. Of concern to some wasthat the BOPRC’s proposed RPS had severalprovisions that apparently suggested that removingmangroves had ecological benefits. As noted in thedecision, “Use of words such as manage mangroves

to avoid the adverse effects of mangrove

proliferation appears to involve an assumption thatproliferation has adverse effects”.

BOPRC senior environmental scientist Stephen Parknotes that arguments as to whether the BOPRC’smangrove management policy was appropriatelybalanced were also raised through the submissions

Aerial view of mangroves in Whitianga.

Photo: NIWA.

Matua Estuary in the Bay of Plenty in January 2012

where mangroves were hand removed three years

previously. Area in the foreground is where bivalves

returned two years after removal. To the right near

the mangroves is where mangroves were removed

by mulching. Photo: BOPRC.

CoastalNews

October 2013 9

process of the proposed RPS and much of thatlanguage had been revised before the case wentto the Environment Court.

Catchment-wide approach

There may be differences of opinion on mangroves,but there is general agreement that a catchment-wide approach is required in improving the healthof the coastal environment. In making his decision,Judge Smith noted that “the reference with thePolicy [RPS] to a Catchment Management Plan givesus a great deal of faith that the question of mangrovemanagement will not be addressed as an isolatedissue. It is simply part of a much larger andcomplicated jigsaw.”

BOPRC land management manager Robyn Skeltonsays that the focus of BOPRC’s efforts has beenon reducing sedimentation in the harbour byimplementing catchment action plans. “Theseinclude landowner incentives and assistance withplanting and fencing of waterways and habitatprotection. We also work with the 10 Estuary Caregroups around the Tauranga Harbour, to help themunderstand and take action on the wider catchmentissues that have promoted mangrove growth,” shesays.

Monitoring change

Over the last four years NIWA has monitored anumber of consented mangrove removals and theresults are mixed says Carolyn. “It can’t be assumedthat just because you remove mangroves meansyou are going to ‘restore’ a previous habitat. Ourmonitoring suggests that there are a number offactors involved, for example, location, depth,exposure, energy, and how much sediment isentering the harbour. There’s also questions on thebest way to remove mangroves if that’s themanagement decision that’s been made.”

NIWA is currently working with Auckland Councilon management guidelines for mangroves that areexpected to be completed before the end of theyear. It will be publicly available and should behelpful for other councils as well.

Sharon says, “While there’s still much we need tolearn about managing our coastal environments,the important thing is that policies support good

decision-making. When the judge gave his finaldecision that ‘[M]angroves are indigenous plantsand play an important role in coastal ecosystems’,it was confirmation of their important ecologicalrole.”

The judge's decision includes the strongly wordedstatement that “the removal of mangroves is primafacie a breach of the preservation requirement ofSection 6(a) of the [Resource Management] Act.Accordingly, there must be some justification toremove mangroves beyond a mere public dislike.”

State of play

In the Bay of Plenty region, 110 ha of mangrovehabitat have been removed using a mechanicalmulching method. This year, the BOPRC is proposingto remove approximately 15 ha of mature mangroveplants from the Uretara, Matahui, Waikaraka,Welcome Bay and Matua estuaries as well as areasnear the Mokoroa golf course and Matahui Road.An Assessment of Environmental Effects is currentlybeing undertaken for the resource consentapplication which is due to be lodged before theend of the year.

BOPRC also applied for a resource consent toundertake mechanical removal of mangrove seedlingsin approximately 600 ha of the Tauranga Harbourin an area where volunteers have removed seedlingsby hand for the past nine years. An IndependentCommissioner decided that this application wouldnot require public notification and this consentapplication has now been approved.

Carbon sequestration

Basil says overall he’s pleased with the outcome,but is disappointed that suggested provisions forthe RPS on carbon sequestration by mangrovesweren’t included in the final decision. “Mangroveshave an important role to play in carbonsequestration. It’s strange to me that we discussoffsets when it comes to native forests on landand our forestry, but pay little attention tomangroves. Even now, it seems like we’re still short-changing the important role mangroves play.”

The Environment Court decision is available in theknowledge centre on the BOPRC website:www.boprc.govt.nz.

Omokoroa Estuary in Tauranga Harbour two years

after mulching. Photo: Basil Graeme.

Mangrove propagules in Waikareao Estuary on

January 2012. Photo: BOPRC.

CoastalNews

Coastal News No. 5410

Ecological guidance for aquaculture

In late August, theMinistry for PrimaryIndustries published acomprehensiveLiterature Review of

Ecological Effects of

Aquaculture, along with

an Overview of the

Ecological Effects of

Aquaculture.

Senior AquacultureAdvisor Steph Hopkins

says the publications focus on the potentialecological effects of existing commercial aquaculturespecies in New Zealand, and those species thatare likely to be developed over the next five years.

“Beyond assisting with current marine aquacultureplanning and management decisions, the literaturereview also identifies knowledge gaps and will aidin prioritising future research,” she says.

The web-based literature review was compiled bytwo of New Zealand's main science providers inaquaculture – the Cawthron Institute and theNational Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research.NIWA and Cawthron also contributed to the overview,with additional input from the Department ofConservation, regional councils, the aquacultureindustry, and others.

The literature review will serve as the basis foradditional aquaculture planning and decision-making tools that MPI is set to publish later thisyear. One is a Decision-makers’ Dashboard thatwill help decision-makers, planners, marine farmers,and others apply the knowledge in the literaturereview to specific aquaculture developmentproposals. The other is an Aquaculture Risk ScreeningTool.

Aquaculture analyst Michael Nielsen says the riskscreening tool will provide a method of vettingaquaculture proposals to identify, prioritise andpotentially manage ecological risks and uncertaintyassociated with the proposal.

“The methodology has been tested using casestudies and refined following a workshop with keytechnical and management experts. The tool willbe primarily intended for use during the siteselection phase of aquaculture development as away to flag potential ecological risks so they canthen be addressed appropriately,” Michael says.

A prototype of the tool is expected to be availableon the MPI website later this year.

Taken together, the resources are part of anAquaculture Ecological Guidance Package that isbeing developed to assist in maintaining andstrengthening New Zealand’s reputation for highenvironmental performance in aquaculture productsand development.

News in BriefThe guidance also meets the aims of both MPI’smedium-term aquaculture research strategy andthe Government’s Aquaculture Strategy and Five-

year Action Plan.

Conservation Management Strategies

On 13 September, submissions closed on the draftCanterbury, Otago, and Southland Murihikuconservation management strategies (CMS). CMSare 10-year strategic documents that describe howthe Department of Conservation (DOC) will manageplaces that are special to communities and tangatawhenua. The strategies reflect ways to achieve bothnational and local conservation goals.

In Otago, one of the issues identified in the CMSis protection of representative examples of Otago’smarine ecosystems and habitats in a network ofmarine protected areas.

“This would keep our marine environments healthyand ensure our special biodiversity, including thehabitats of threatened wildlife, like New Zealandsea lions and yellow-eyed penguins, survives intothe future,” DOC’s Coastal Otago Ranger Jim Fyfesays.

He says the national marine protected areas gapanalysis by DOC and the Ministry for PrimaryIndustries in 2011 shows the Otago coast is laggingbehind the rest of New Zealand.

“This report shows how low the levels of marineprotection in Otago are. There are major gaps inrepresentation with only five out of the 37 habitatsdescribed for this region represented in marineprotected areas in New Zealand. Very few of ourhabitats and special wildlife foraging habitats areprotected from pressures on the marineenvironment,” Jim says.

For the draft Canterbury CMS, one of the key issuesidentified is “[V]aluing the coastal environment,both land and marine, and establishing adequateprotective measures”. In the draft Southland MurihikuCMS, priorities for marine conservation include,“managing marine reserves to ensure the full benefitof protection is realised, managing biosecuritythreats, and ensuring that marine wildlife such asthe New Zealand sea lion, southern right whale,and Hector’s dolphin are flourishing within intactecosystems”.

Over 1000 submissions were received across thethree CMS. Hearings will be held in October andNovember for submitters who asked to speak totheir submission. DOC will then prepare a summaryof submissions and revise each draft CMS inpreparation for sending them to their respectiveconservation boards by March 2014.

Earlier this year, submissions and hearings closedon CMS for Northland, Auckland and Waikato.Revised draft CMS were prepared and sent torespective conservation boards in late August andearly September.

CoastalNews

October 2013 11

Word from the Chairby Deirdre Hart

In my previous Wordfrom the Chair, Ipromised an updatefrom the InternationalGeomorphologyConference in Paris. Theconference was wellattended, with the mainroom occupied by thecoastal sessions. Whilethere were a number of

excellent talks and discussions, I would like tomention three that may be of particular interest toNZCS members.

1) Gerd Masselink, formerly from Australia andnow at the University of Plymouth, gave aninteresting talk about gravel-barrier nourishmentand recontouring. The ‘take home’ messagewas that width is the key to creating an effectivestorm defense, whereas increasing barrier heightincreased swash run-up elevations and thereforeover-topping, hinterland flooding and breachingpotential.

2) Edward Anthony, from Marseilles, gave a talkco-authored by Charles Lemckert, from GriffithUniversity, about the future of coastal resortcities, such as Gold Coast City, with climatechange and sea-level rise. Their conclusion wasthat managed retreat was the only viable strategyfor such places, which could mitigate the hazardwhile safeguarding the environmental valuesthat their economies were based around, astrategy which was not being applied to thenecessary scale at present, particularly inAustralia.

3) Lastly, Dennis Brunsden, Kings College London,gave a plenary titled “Tales from the Deep”.Using an impressive array of chemical andsounding analyses and illustrations, he calledfor coastal scientists to pay more attention toresearching the world's seabeds. He commented,

“The sea floor occupies 71 per cent of theEarth’s surface, some 361,419,000 km2. It istruly the last geomorphological frontier.”

At the conference overall, it was great to see coastalissues centre stage among other geomorphic topics.

This is my last Word from the Chair before I stepdown from the management committee at the endof seven years of service. During this time, I havebeen amazed by the professionalism, skills, depthof experience, and commitment to all things coastalof NZCS members, as demonstrated by the membersof our management committee, contributions toCoastal News, volunteers involved with theconference organising each year, as well asthroughout our wider society. I hope that theProfessional Development Award launched this yearproves to be effective encouragement for individualsand an opportunity for NZCS to capitalise on theextension of our knowledge and experience.

I have been fortunate to learn much from NZCSmembers and associates, and firmly believe thatthe breadth of our professional background andqualifications is a key NZCS strength, unmatchedby other professional bodies with whom I interact.

At the same time, I have been humbled andencouraged by the dogged dedication of non-professional individuals and groups in coastalcommunities. It is thanks to these people thatmany of our more stunning coastal environmentshave been protected, cared for and/or rehabilitated.I encourage you to acknowledge the work of thesepeople by nominating them for the Coastal ChampionAwards.

This is not goodbye as I will continue to be involvedwith NZCS in the future and encourage those ofyou who have not yet had a go on the managementor conference committees to volunteer your timeand skills.

A bientôt – see you in Hokitika.

A new report from GNS Science shows someparts of the New Zealand coast are exposed togreater tsunami hazard than previously thought,while the hazard in other coastal regions is thesame or even less.

The report was compiled by GNS Scientist DrWilliam Powers and was commissioned by theMinistry for Civil Defence and EmergencyManagement.

The main areas where tsunami pose a greaterhazard than previously understood are:

• the coasts of Northland, the northwest part

Tsunami Hazardsof Auckland, Great Barrier Island, theCoromandel Peninsula, and the Bay of Plenty;

• the North Island’s East Cape and parts of theWairarapa coast; and

• Southland, Stewart Island, Fiordland andWestland.

The estimated maximum tsunami wave heightsin some of these areas have increased by about50 per cent.

The report is available on the Ministry of CivilDefence and Emergency Management website atwww.civildefence.govt.nz/.

CoastalNews

Coastal News No. 5412

Coasts and Ports 2013 OverviewArticle and photos by Tom Shand, Tonkin & Taylor

Ltd and New Zealand representative on the local

organising committee.

The first Australasian Conference on CoastalEngineering was held at Manly Beach, Sydney in1973 attended by a handful of the then-fledglingcoastal engineering and science fraternity. Since thisinaugural gathering, the conference has grown insize and scope and, 40 years later, returned to Manlyfor arguably the most successful conference yet.

Held 19 to 21 September, the 21st AustralasianCoastal and Ocean Engineering Conference includedkeynote addresses on:

• the “Sustainable Development of NourishedShorelines” featuring the massive 20 million m3

‘sand engine’ project in the Netherlands;

• the World Association for Waterborne Transportand Infrastructure’s (PIANC) “Working with Nature”philosophy; and

• the “Interpretation of Good Faith in StatutoryImmunities for Coastal Land-Use PlanningDecisions”.

Over 170 papers were presented to nearly 400delegates on topics ranging from advances in coastalscience and management practices, to port and

Returning to where it all began, the 21st Australasian Coastal and Ocean Engineering Conference was held

at Manly Beach, Sydney in September.

Local Aboriginal custodians welcomed the 400

conference delegates.

harbour engineering. Field trips along Sydney’sNorthern Beaches and to Sydney Port weresupplemented with a sand-nourishment forum toshare ideas and experiences.

Special thanks to the New Zealanders who supportedthe conference by making the trip across the Tasmanand to Discovery Marine Limited, MetOcean Solutionsand Tonkin & Taylor for their generous sponsorship.

The conference was wrapped up with anannouncement that the next Coasts and Ports willbe held in New Zealand in 2015. With some extremelylarge boots to fill we look forward to seeing you allthere.

NZCS Regional CoordinatorsEvery region has a NZCS Regional Coordinator who is available to help you with any queries aboutNZCS activities or coastal issues in your local area.

North IslandNorthland Michael Day michaeld@nrc.govt.nz

André Labonté labonte@xtra.co.nzAuckland Hugh Leersnyder hugh.leersnyder@beca.comWaikato Christin Atchinson christin.atchinson@waikatoregion.govt.nzBay of Plenty Mark Ivamy MIvamy@tonkin.co.nz

Sharon De Luca sharon.deluca@boffamiskell.co.nzHawke’s Bay Neil Daykin Daykin@hbrc.govt.nzTaranaki Emily Roberts emily.roberts@trc.govt.nzWellington Iain Dawe iain.dawe@gw.govt.nz

South IslandUpper South Island Eric Verstappen eric.verstappen@tasman.govt.nzCanterbury Justin Cope justin.cope@ecan.govt.nzOtago Suzanne Watt suzanne.watt@orc.govt.nz

Jamie Torrance jamie.torrance@orc.govt.nzSouthland TBC hugh.leersnyder@beca.com

CoastalNews

October 2013 13

News from the RegionsNorthland Regionby Michael Day, Regional Coordinator

Whangarei Harbour Water QualityImprovement Strategy

The Whangarei

Harbour Water Quality

Improvement Strategy

(the strategy) is theresult of a jointNorthland RegionalCouncil – WhangareiDistrict Council projectto better align andenhance themanagement of waterquality in theWhangarei Harbour.

The strategy sets out what we know about thequality of water in the harbour, the known andlikely impacts of water quality on its importantuses and values, the sources of contamination,and the respective actions of both councils tomaintain and improve its water quality.

The focus of the strategy is on the upper harbourbecause that is where water quality is oftendegraded. Water in the middle and lower areas ofthe harbour is generally of a high quality.

A key action of the strategy is to collaborativelydevelop an integrated catchment management planfor the harbour and its contributing catchment.This will involve working closely with the community,key stakeholders, and iwi and hapu to establishcatchment-specific management objectives andassociated water quality limits (enforceablestandards). Other important actions includeimproving the performance of wastewater andstormwater reticulation and treatment infrastructureand working closely with rural landowners in theharbour catchment to prevent and reduce loads ofsediments, nutrients, and faecal matter enteringthe harbour.

The strategy can be viewed at:www.nrc.govt.nz/whangareiharbourstrategy.

Whangarei Harbour Sedimentation Report

The Northland Regional Council and Northportcommissioned NIWA to determine historical ratesof sediment accumulation and contemporary sourcesof catchment sediments depositing in the WhangareiHarbour system.

The results of this study will provide resourceplanners, politicians and the public with valuableinformation regarding sediment accumulation ratesand the present-day sources of sedimentaccumulating in the Whangarei Harbour system.This, together with previous studies of sedimentationin the Kaipara Harbour and the Bay of Islandssystem, will help the regional council to make

informed management decisions on activities thatcontribute to sediment erosion and prioritiseland-management initiatives to reduce sedimenterosion and runoff to estuaries.

The information from this report will be valuablefor the development of water managementobjectives, limits, and targets for the harbourcatchment. The report can be viewed by going tothe resource library on www.nrc.govt.nz and searchfor Whangarei Harbour Sedimentation Report.

Bay of Plenty

by Sharon De Luca and Mark Ivamy

Regional Co-Coordinators

Bay of Plenty Coast Care

Bay of Plenty Coast Care has been in action for 19years, and now has over 20 local Coast Care groupsrestoring the region’s dune vegetation. Bay of PlentyCoast Care recently celebrated the one-millionthplant to find a new home on the Bay of Plentycoastline.

Pilot Bay Boardwalk

Tauranga City Council (TCC) has recently completedconstruction of a boardwalk along Pilot Bay atMount Maunganui. The boardwalk was installed inresponse to the severe wear marks in the turf(informal tracks) due to high use from walkers. Thewear was becoming worse with the generalpopulation increase and the rising number of cruiseships visiting Tauranga.

TCC received strong public opinion both for andagainst the boardwalk, with the majority supportingthe boardwalk. The elected members wanted totry and maximise the green space at the SalisburyWharf end and this is why the boardwalk weavesin and out of the trees. Public feedback uponcompletion of the project has been extremelypositive.

TCC has also replenished the beach with sand toeliminate the drop off from the grass to the beach.Two other projects were also incorporated into theboardwalk project, namely pedestrian crossingsand stormwater upgrades.

Pilot Bay Boardwalk. Photo: TCC.

CoastalNews

Coastal News No. 5414

Papamoa Surf Lifesaving Club

Boffa Miskell has been working for the PapamoaSurf Lifesaving Club assisting them in planning fortheir new building and ensuring it is appropriatelyprovided for in Tauranga City Council’s Coastal

Reserve Management Plan, which is currently beingfinalised.  The building is designed to meet theneeds of the club’s 655 members (and growing)who last year saved 59 lives along Papamoa Beach. 

The building will be a huge improvement upon theexisting building, which is now in a state of disrepairand too small to meet the activity and storagerequirements of the club. Green building principleswill be used in the design. Its low slung architecturaldesign will fit better within the coastal landscape.

The next phase of the project is to obtain resourceconsent followed by detailed architectural design.

Waikatoby Christin Atchinson, Regional Coordinator

Erosion at two Whitianga beaches

A severe storm in late September led to a reasonablysignificant amount of beach erosion at Whitianga’sBuffalo and Brophy’s beaches, raising concernsabout future damage to Buffalo Beach Rd andadjoining reserve areas. A recently planted dunedesigned to help stabilise central Buffalo Beachbore up well to the storm. The rock revetmentsalso generally stood up well, although the wallscontributed to wave overtopping on to the adjacentroad.

The Waikato Regional Council (WRC) has recentlycommitted $170,000 to the Whitianga Coastal ActionSteering Group project (a collaboration betweenWRC, Thames Coromandel District Council, iwi andcommunity members) for investigative modellingwork to identify long-term solutions to deal withthe coastal erosion hazard at Buffalo Beach.

Hawke’s Bayby Neil Daykin, Regional Coordinator

Clifton Motor Camp

Erosion at Clifton Motor Camp has continued andin recent months has resulted in loss of vehicleaccess and underground mains water (now reinstatedwith a surface pipe). Permission has been soughtfrom Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) fortemporary concrete blocks to be placed on thebeach to protect the power transformer providingpower to the camp and fishing club.

Hastings District Council (HDC) worked with thecamp owners on a resource consent application toconstruct a limestone rock revetment at the CliftonReserve. Resource consent was given and the80-m long revetment has restored access to thereserve and its campground, marine club and boatramp. As part of the application, HDC proposedthat the structure should be removed after fiveyears or earlier if it is found to cause significantdowndrift erosion.

Napier (Westshore) Breakwater

Napier City Council has applied for a resourceconsent to construct a breakwater at WhakarireAvenue, Westshore, Napier. The proposed rockbreakwater will be ‘H’ shaped. Part of it will beconstructed over an existing breakwater structure.

The purpose of the new structure is to preventfurther erosion occurring along Whakarire Avenueand at the southern end of Westshore Beach. Theapplication has been publicly notified.

Haumoana Coastal Protection Project

Representatives from HDC, HBRC, and the Haumoanacommunity group Walking on Water (WOW) recentlymet to discuss potential mitigation measures tomanage the effects of the proposed Haumoanagroyne scheme on coastal processes and shorelineerosion.

During the meeting, the representatives agreedthat the provision of a groyne field in the vicinityof Haumoana will have the benefit of stabilisingthe shoreline at that location through accretionand in a reduction in the rate of erosion within thegroyne field.

There was also agreement that there would benegative downstream effects from a groyne field(such as increased erosion to the north aroundEast Clive foreshore).

The following possible approaches to mitigate theimpacts were reported on during the meeting:

1. Replace the gravel that the scheme withholdsfrom the longshore drift supply, both in termsof filling the beaches between the groynes (one-off 100,000 m3) and an annual compensationvolume (18,000 m3).

2. Allow the increased rate of erosion north ofthe Tukituki groyne to take place and addressthe impacts on infrastructure through new andextended (landward) coastal protectionstructures.

3. Consider a combination of components fromoptions 1 and 2.

Figure 1 (page 15) is the projected coastline to thenorth (downstream) of the proposed groyne fieldafter 50 years with no groynes. Figure 2 (page 15)is with a groyne field, but no mitigation.

Clifton Motor Camp. Photo: HBRC.

CoastalNews

October 2013 15

Figure 1 (left): Predicted coastline after 50 years with no Haumoana groyne scheme; Figure 2 (right): Predicted

coastline after 50 years with the Haumoana groyne scheme (no mitigation or prefill). Figures: HBRC.

NZCS Management CommitteeChairperson: Deirdre Hart deirdre.hart@canterbury.ac.nz

Deputy Chairperson/IPENZ Coordinator: Rick Liefting rick.liefting@waikatoregion.govt.nz

Treasurer: Eric Verstappen eric.verstappen@tasman.govt.nz

Deputy Treasurer: Andrew Swales a.swales@niwa.co.nz

Membership & Partners Liaison: Paul Creswell paul.creswell@mpi.govt.nz

Regional Coordinator: Hugh Leersnyder hugh.leersnyder@beca.com

Education & University Coordinator: Christopher Gomez christopher.gomez@canterbury.ac.nz

Central Government Coordinator: Sarah McRae smcrae@doc.govt.nz

Coastal News Coordinator: Amy Robinson amy.robinson@waikatoregion.govt.nz

Website & Digest Coordinator: Jose Borrero jose@ecoast.co.nz

Other NZCS Contacts

Administrator & Communications Coordinator: Renee Foster nzcoastalsociety@gmail.com

Coastal News Editor: Shelly Biswell shelly@biswell.net

Sharon is the regional co-coordinator for the Bay ofPlenty. She has more than12 years’ experience in marineecology, along with six years’experience in freshwater andterrestrial ecology. She iscurrently a Senior Ecologist

and Principal with Boffa Miskell and leads thecompany’s marine ecology team. Prior to workingfor Boffa Miskell, she was a Post-Doctoral ResearchFellow at City University in Hong Kong.

Sharon has significant experience in assessmentof effects on coastal/marine and freshwaterecological values, preparation of aquatic

Regional Coordinator Close-up – Sharon De Lucamonitoring programmes, habitat surveys,contaminant analyses and restoration plans, andpreparation and presentation of expert witnessevidence.

In her role with Boffa Miskell, she advises a largerange of clients, including private landowners,district and regional councils, infrastructurecompanies, and government agencies. Over thepast several years, she has also worked closelywith NZTA on a number of Projects of NationalSignificance.

Sharon is a Certified Environmental Practitionerwith the Environment Institute of Australia andNew Zealand.

NZCS Mission StatementThe New Zealand Coastal Society was inaugurated in 1992 “to promote and advance sustainablemanagement of the coastal environment”. The society provides a forum for those with a genuineinterest in the coastal zone to communicate amongst themselves and with the public. The societycurrently has over 400 members, including representatives from a wide range of coastal science,

engineering and planning disciplines, employed in the engineering industry; local, regional and centralgovernment; research centres; and universities.

Applications for membership should be sent to NZCS AdministratorRenee Foster (email: nzcoastalsociety@gmail.com).

DisclaimerOpinions expressed in Coastal News are those of various authors and do not necessarily represent those of theeditor, the NZCS management committee, or NZCS. Every effort is made to provide accurate and factual content.The publishers and editorial staff, however, cannot accept responsibility for any inadvertent errors or omissionsthat may occur.

The New Zealand Coastal Society would like to acknowledgeour corporate members for their support:

Professional Development AwardNZCS is currently accepting applications for its inaugural Professional Development Award.

The purpose of the award is to enhance the ability of NZCS members to contribute to the vision ofNZCS.

Applications are open to NZCS professional members who have been a full NZCS member for at leastthree consecutive years prior to the date of application, and be in full or part-time employment in NewZealand with relevant responsibilities in coastal management, research, consulting, or similar work.The successful applicant will be awarded up to NZ$10,000 toward the expenses of pursuing a professionaldevelopment opportunity that is relevant to the achievement of the NZCS vision.

Applications close 8 November 2013. For an application form, visit www.coastalsociety.org.nz or contactthe NZCS Administrator at nzcoastalsociety@gmail.com.

The successful applicant will be announced at the NZCS Conference (19 to 22 November in Hokitika).

CoastalNews

Coastal News No. 5416